Wisconsin Women's Business Initiative Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391597954
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, USA
- Phone
- 4142635450
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,906,648
- Expenses
- $13,984,745
- Assets
- $40,524,297
- Liabilities
- $32,044,345
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WENDY K BAUMANN (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KIMBERLY ZEULI (SMALL BUS. FINANCE FWRD PROJ.): $258,429 total reported compensation
- WENDY K BAUMANN (PRESIDENT): $211,554 total reported compensation
- JON GAINES (VP BUSINESS AND FINANCE): $182,279 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Wwbic opens the doors of opportunity by providing any individuals who are interested in starting, strengthening, or expanding businesses with access to resources such as financial products and quality business and personal financial training.
What it reported doing in 2024
During fy 2024, wwbic administered a diverse business investment grant.wwbic also administered a fiscal sponsorship project which surveys businesses and entrepreneurial support organizations (esos). This information is compiled into a report and forwarded to the main reporting entity to develop capacity building programs and services to support the esos in their efforts to support small businesses.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 63
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: $62.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 27.3%; rating input score 27; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -57%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.9; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $258K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $585K reported
- Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.